Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubulumach
You haven't understood me FrancoItaly.
Not quartz oscillator amplitude control, but mixing amplitide control, which going from oscillator via several small serial capacitors 1pF to the base of tr2 bc183c. This place is main phenomenon detector.
Amount of oscillator signal is enough to suppress phenomenon signals which are bipolar in nature. In once case we have rising and in the other decaying control signal at the dc output of the sensor stage. In simple words mixing both signals - from the oscillator and phenomenon must be dynamically or variabile in accordance with some threshold of dc output amplitude.
We dont need suppression of phenomenon signal via constant amount of oscillator signal, nor undetected phenomenon signal. Mixing amplitude should be additive in some variabile values, small variabile offset, to maintain constant dc offset in some useful range for example from 3.05v - 3,75v at the output of sensor stage. We dont need overshooting or undershooting control dc volatge which is phenomenon amplitude modulated.
Best regards 
dubulumach |
My opinion does not change, in the mixing stage there is a "mixing" between two signals, one of constant amplitude (quartz oscillator) and the other of variable amplitude (the phenomenon) and I do not see how it can improve. It should also be borne in mind that even getting an increase in sensitivity to the phenomenon, at the same time it would almost certainly be a appearance of the compass effect.